Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Barbara A. Cook, Benjamin M. Ford, Bronte E. Van Helden, J. Dale Roberts, Paul G. Close, Peter C. Speldewinde Citation
Cook, B. A., Ford, B. M., Van Helden, B. E., Roberts, J. D., Close, P. G., Speldewinde, P. C. (2016). Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia. Report No CENRM 142 . Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, University of Western Australia.
Copyright © 2016 Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, University of Western Australia. Disclaimer The view expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the Commonwealth of Australia, and the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for any information or advice contained herein.
Contents
Acknowledgements ...... 5 Abstract ...... 6 Introduction ...... 8 Methods...... 11 Inclusion of climate change in existing recovery documentation ...... 11 Bioclimatic modelling ...... 18 Results ...... 22 Inclusion of climate change in existing recovery documentation ...... 22 Bioclimatic modelling ...... 24 Discussion ...... 37 References ...... 43
List of Tables Table 1 Threatened vertebrate species examined in assessment of the extent to which existing recovery plans and related documentation address climate change, and/or modelled...... 14 Table 2 Climatic and environmental variables utilised in species distribution modelling...... 19 Table 3 Inclusion of climate change in recovery documentation for vertebrate groups in southwestern Australia by faunal group...... 23 Table 4 Climate change threats and mitigation identified in recovery documents for threatened vertebrate species considered most exposed to climate change threats...... 34
List of Figures Figure 1. Location of study area in Australia...... 12 Figure 2. Department of Parks and Wildlife regions in Western Australia...... 13 Figure 3 Proportion of recovery documents that have identified each of eight threatening processes...... 22 Figure 4 Proportion of recovery documents noting climate change as a threatening process across years...... 23 Figure 5 Average importance of climatic variables for all species modelled...... 24 Figure 6 Range in the predicted percent change in area of climate envelope by 2030 for species modelled...... 26 Figure 7 Range in the predicted percent change in area of climate envelope by 2080 for species modelled...... 27 Figure 8 Range in percent of occurrence records in predicted area of climate envelope overlap by 2030 for each species...... 30 Figure 9 Range in percent of occurrence records in predicted area of climate envelope overlap by 2080 for each species...... 31
2 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 10 Proposed gradient of management interventions for mitigating climate change impacts for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia...... 33
3 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Department of the Environment for providing funding through the Australian Government’s Regional Natural Resource Management Planning for Climate Change Fund.
5 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Abstract
Recovery plans are the main tool used for restoration of threatened species in Australia, and identification of key threatening processes is an important feature of these plans. The aim of this study was to identify how climate change can be incorporated into the recovery planning process using a case study of threatened vertebrates in southwestern Australia. Analysis of documentation for 74 threatened vertebrate species in the region found that prior to 2004, climate change was not included as a threatening process in recovery documentation. Post 2004, 42% of documents included climate change as a threatening process. Using bioclimatic modelling, 43 of these species were ranked in terms of their potential exposure to climate change, and a gradient of management intervention aimed at mitigation against exposure to climate change was proposed for these species. This intervention gradient ranged from active management actions aimed at species potentially at risk of extinction due to climate change, through to preservation of habitat in species predicted to lose between zero and 25% of their current distribution. It was proposed that as a priority, the recovery documentation of the 17 species predicted to be most at risk should identify climate change as a key threatening process, and that more comprehensive analyses of climate vulnerability be undertaken for these species. Such an approach aimed at prioritising climate change mitigation in threatened species would be useful for other regions where it has been predicted that climate change could have a negative impact on biodiversity.
6 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
7 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Introduction
Southern Australia is expected to experience reduced rainfall, elevated temperatures, and increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather events as a result of climate change (Easterling et al. 2000; Hughes 2003). The southwestern Australian (SWA) ecoregion is one of five global regions consistently predicted by various climate models to experience increased frequency of drought in the future (Prudhomme et al. 2014). In this region, strong gradients exist for both rainfall and temperature, with annual rainfall decreasing west to east and average temperatures decreasing north to south (Indian Ocean Climate Initiative 2002). It is predicted that by 2030, average temperature across southern Australia will have increased by 0.5-1.5°C, and by 2070, it is estimated that average temperatures will have increased by 1-4°C (Suppiah et al. 2007). By 2030, decreases in rainfall of 0-0.5% are projected for southern Australia, with 5-10% decreases projected for SWA under a low emissions scenario. Under high emissions scenarios, the magnitude of projected decrease in rainfall for southern Australia is 5-10%, with a 10-20% decrease predicted for SWA. By 2070, decreases of 10-20% are expected along the south coast and 30-40% in the south west corner of the region (Suppiah et al. 2007).
This rapid climate change is likely to negatively impact global biodiversity (Thomas et al. 2004), including that found in Australia (Lindenmayer et al. 2010). Hardest hit will be those species considered already at risk of extinction due to existing threatening processes such as habitat loss, introduced species and inappropriate fire regimes (Evans et al. 2011). At a national level, the principal environment legislation in Australia that aims to protect these species at risk of extinction is The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). This legislation identifies and lists threatened species and communities, and advises the development of conservation advices, recovery and threat abatement plans to reduce key threatening processes. In the State of Western Australia, species that are rare, or likely to become extinct without special protection, are listed under the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. Species listed as threatened under this legislation are classified as either ‘critically endangered’ (CR), ‘endangered’ (EN) or ‘vulnerable’ (VU) using the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List categories and criteria. To date, there are 134 vertebrate species (44 mammal, 52 bird, 26 reptile, three amphibian and nine fish species) State-listed as threatened (CR, EN and VU) for Western Australia. At a national scale, 13% of Australia’s known terrestrial vertebrate species are formally listed as threatened under the EPBC Act (Taylor et al. 2011).
8 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
As is the case for the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Tear et al. 1995; Foin et al. 1998; Povilitis and Suckling 2010), recovery plans are the main tool used for restoration of species listed under both the EPBC and the Wildlife Conservation Acts. Recovery plans summarise what is known about the taxonomy, biology, distribution, critical habitat and conservation status of threatened species, and identify key threatening processes and recovery actions to be undertaken to achieve the objectives of the plan. Details on the proposed budget and duration of the plan, as well as major benefits or negative impacts to non-target native species, affected interests and socio-economic benefits are also provided. The ultimate goal of these plans is to improve the conservation status of species so that they can eventually become delisted (Carroll et al. 1996; Foin et al. 1998). Although recovery plans are considered a reliable source of information as they are generally written by specialists familiar with all aspects of the threatened species in question (Povilitis and Suckling 2010), their effectiveness as a conservation tool has been questioned (Tear et al. 1995; Foin et al. 1998; Boersma et al. 2001; Stokstad 2005; Bottrill et al. 2011). Lack of success of these plans has variously been attributed to delays in development and weak goals (Carroll et al. 1996), lack of clear criteria to define recovery (Westwood et al. 2014), poor implementation of recovery tasks (Lundquist et al. 2002; Taylor et al. 2005), and failure to designate critical habitat (Schwartz 2008), amongst others.
Recovery plans are also likely to be less successful if they fail to identify key threatening processes, and thus do not formulate management actions to ameliorate these. In an investigation of the nature and treatment of threats in recovery plans for 181 species listed under the ESA, Lawler et al. (2002) found that these plans lacked basic information for 39% of threats faced by these species. Consequently, threats that were better understood were assigned recovery actions more often than threats that were poorly understood (Lawler et al. 2002). Given that our understanding of climate change as a threatening process has only gained impetus in recent times, it is feasible that this threatening process has not been given sufficient attention in conservation planning to date. For example, an assessment of the spatial distribution of eight threatening processes for 1700 EPBC-listed species of plants and animals in Australia did not include ‘climate change’, as the recovery documentation examined at the time of the study did not identify it as an important threatening process for any of the species analysed (Evans et al. 2011). Similarly, a review of recovery actions for threatened freshwater fish in Australia revealed little or no consideration of
9 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
climatic extremes such as droughts and floods, despite the fact that these extreme events are likely to increase in frequency in Australia with climate change (Lintermans et al. 2013). The omission of climate change as a key threat in existing recovery plans is noteworthy, in so much as, many threatened species are expected to be vulnerable to climate change impacts (e.g. Bagne et al. 2014) due for example to their small population sizes, restricted distributions, or reliance of specific habitats (Thomas et al. 2011).
Investigations of how climate change has been addressed in recovery planning are limited. Povilitis and Suckling (2010) reviewed over 1200 plans for threatened species listed under the ESA, concluding that there was a need to update recovery plans for climate change. This analysis showed that after 2004, attention to climate change in new and revised recovery plans increased substantially, suggesting that older, operational plans should be reviewed in the light of new data and analyses on climate change. To the best of our knowledge, there has yet to be a systematic updating of recovery plans in the light of new knowledge on climate change in Australia.
The aim of this study was to identify how climate change can be incorporated into the recovery planning process using a case study of threatened vertebrates in southwestern Australia. More specifically, we (i) examined the extent to which existing recovery plans for threatened vertebrates address climate change threats, (ii) used bioclimatic modelling to predict the likely impact of climate change on 43 threatened vertebrate species, and (iii) based on these projections, proposed a gradient of management actions aimed at climate change mitigation to be undertaken and incorporated into recovery documentation for these threatened species.
10 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Methods
Inclusion of climate change in existing recovery documentation We focussed our study on threatened vertebrates that occur in a globally recognised biodiversity hotspot, comprising approximately 480 000 km2 and located in the southwestern Australian ecoregion (Myers et al. 2000), (Figure 1). This region has undergone extensive land clearing, and is one of five regions globally where there is high consensus among climate models regarding the decrease in rainfall due to climate change (Prudhomme et al. 2014). Southwestern Australia and parts of South Australia together encompass one of the five Mediterranean ecosystems that occur globally. These five areas support 20% of the Earth’s known vascular plant diversity. High levels of land conversion for agriculture, development and other human uses have resulted in these areas being considered a global conservation priority. Most of this region is characterised by a Mediterranean-type climate, with warm, dry summers and cooler, wetter winters. Increasing temperatures and decreasing rainfall associated with future climate change is expected to further threaten biodiversity in the Australian Mediterranean ecosystem.
11 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 1. Location of study area in Australia. Dark grey shaded area represents southwestern Australia.
For the assessment of the extent to which existing recovery plans and other recovery documentation for threatened vertebrates in southwestern Australia address climate change threats, we included all terrestrial and freshwater vertebrate species that were State-listed (as of 3 December 2014) as being threatened (either CR, EN or VU). We also included selected priority species that occurred in the Department of Parks and Wildlife regions of Goldfields, Midwest, Wheatbelt, South Coast, Swan, South West and Warren (Figure 2). This resulted in an initial compilation consisting of 123 species, 76 of which had either a recovery plan, conservation advice, fauna profile or action statement. These 76 species consisted of 26 mammals, 35 birds, nine reptiles, three amphibians and three fish species (Table 1). For
12 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
each species, we obtained existing recovery documentation (recovery plans, conservation advices, commonwealth listing advices, fauna profiles, action plans or action statements) from either the Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife ( www.dpaw.wa.gov.au ) or Commonwealth Government Department of the Environment ( www.environment.gov.au ) websites. We reviewed each document to determine whether climate change or related phenomena were described as a threat or potential threat, and noted whether the documents included any recovery actions aimed at mitigation against climate change.
Figure 2. Department of Parks and Wildlife regions in Western Australia with the southwest study area shaded grey.
13 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Table 1 Threatened vertebrate species examined in assessment of the extent to which existing recovery plans and related documentation address climate change, and/or modelled (indicated with an asterisk). CR = critically endangered, EN = endangered, VU = vulnerable, P = Priority, RP = recovery plan, CA = conservation advice, AP = action plan, AS = action statement, CLA = commonwealth listing advice. Group Species Common name Status Documents Records Mammals Bettongia lesueur lesueur Shark Bay Boodie VU RP - Bettongia penicillata ogilbyi Woylie* CR RP 174 Dasyurus geoffroii Chuditch VU RP - Falsistrellus mackenziei Western False Pipistrelle* P4 AP 97 Hydromys chrysogaster Water -rat* P4 - 88 Isoodon obesulus fusciventer Quenda* P5 FP 1345 Lagorchestes hirsutus bernieri Rufous Hare -wallaby VU RP - Lagostrophus fasciatus fasciatus Banded Hare -wallaby VU AP - Leporillus conditor Great Stick -nest Rat VU CLA - Macropus eugenii derbianus Tammar Wallaby* P5 FP 136 Macropus irma Western Brush Wallably* P4 FP 792 Macrotis lagotis Bilby VU RP - Myrmecobius fasciatus Numbat* VU CA 472 Notoryctes caurinus Northern Marsupial Mole EN RP - Notoryctes typhlops Southern marsupial Mole EN RP - Nyctophilus major Central Long -eared Bat* P4 - 10 Parantechinus apicalis Dibbler* EN RP 38 Parameles bougainville bougainville Western Barred Bandicoot EN RP - Petrogale lateralis hacketti Recherche Rock -wallaby VU RP - Petrogale lateralis lateralis Black -flanked Rock -wallaby* VU RP 115 Petrogale lateralis ssp. (ANCW CM15314) Black -footed Rock -wallaby VU RP Phascogale calura Red -tailed Phascogale* EN CA 209 Phascogale tapoatafa tapoatafa Brush -tailed Phascogale* VU FP 37 Potorous gilbertii Gilbert’s Potoroo CR RP -
14 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Group Species Common name Status Documents Records Pseudocheirus occidentalis Western Ringtail Possum* EN RP 5161 Pseudomys fieldi Shark Bay Mouse VU RP - Pseudomys occidentalis Western Mouse* P4 - 62 Pseudomys shortridgei Heath Mouse* VU FP 37 Setonix brachyurus Quokka* VU RP 309
Birds Ardeotis australis Australian Bustard* P4 AP 1615 Atrichornis clamosus Noisy Scrub -bird* EN RP 128 Botaurus poiciloptilus Australasian Bittern* EN CA 82 Cacatua leadbeateri Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo* SPF AS 79 Cacatua pastinator pastinator Muir’s Corella* SPF RP 182 Calamanthus campestris dorrie Rufous Fieldwren (Dorre Is) VU AP - Calamanthus campestris hartogi Rufous Fieldwren (Dirk Hartog Is) VU AP - Calamanthus campestris montanellus Rufous Fieldwren (Western wheatbelt)* P4 AP 13 Calyptorhynchus banksii naso Forest Red -tailed Black Cockatoo* VU RP 938 Calyptorhynchus baudinii Baudin’s Cockatoo* EN RP 960 Calyptorhynchus latirostris Carnaby’s Cockatoo* EN RP 2956 Cereopsis novaehollandiae grisea Recherche Cape Barren Goose VU CA - Dasyornis longirostris Western Bristlebird* VU RP 161 Falco hypoleucos Grey Falcon VU AP - Hylacola cauta whitlocki Shy Heathwren (Western subsp.)* P4 AP 36 Ixobrychus flavicollis australis Black Bittern (SW population) P1 AP - Ixobrychus minutus Little Bittern P4 AP - Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl* VU RP 1023 Malurus lanberti bernieri Variegated Fairy -wren (Shark Bay) VU AP - Malurus leucopterus leucopterus Dirk Hartog Black and White Fairy -wren VU CA - Neochmia ruficauda subclarescens Star Finch (Western) P4 AP - Ninox connivens connivens Barking Owl (SW population)* P2 AP 9
15 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Group Species Common name Status Documents Records Oreoica gutturalis gutturalis Crested Bellbird (Southern) P4 AP - Oxyura australis Blue -billed Duck P4 AP - Pezoporus flaviventris Western Ground Parrot CR RP - Pezoporus occidentalis Night Parrot CR CA - Platycercus icterotis xanthogenys Western Rosella (Inland ssp.)* P4 AP 78 Polytelis alexandrae Princess Parrot P4 CA - Psophodes nigrogularis nigrogularis Western Whipbird (Western heath subsp.) EN RP - Psophodes nigrogularis oberon Western Whipbird (Southern WA ssp)* P4 RP, CLA 80 Stipiturus malachurus hartogi Southern Emu -wren (Dirk Hartog Is) VU AP - Thinornis rubricollis Hooded Plover P4 CA - Turnix varia scintillans Abrolhos Painted Button -quail EN CA - Tyto novaehollandiae novaehollandiae Masked Owl (SW ssp)* P3 AP 33
Reptiles Ctenophorus yinnietharra Yinnietharra Rock Dragon VU CA Ctenotus delli Dell’s Skink* P4 - 24 Ctenotus lancelini Lancelin Island Skink VU RP Ctenotus zastictus Hamelin Ctenotus VU CA Egernia stokesii aethiops Baudin Island Spiny -tailed Skink VU RP Egernia stokesii badia Western Spiny -tailed Skink VU RP Egernia stokesii stokesii Spiny -tailed Skink P4 RP Lerista lineata Lined Skink* P3 - 60 Liopholis kintorei Giant Desert Skink VU RP Liopholis pulchra longicauda Jurien Bay Skink VU CA Morelia spilota imbricata Carpet Python* SPF - 134 Neelaps calonotos Black -striped Snake* P3 - 38 Pseudemydura umbrina Western Swamp Tortoise CR RP
Amphibians Geocrinia alba White -bellied Frog* CR RP 76
16 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Group Species Common name Status Documents Records Geocrinia lutea Nornalup Frog* P4 - 10 Geocrinia vitellina Orange -bellied Frog VU RP Spicospina flammocaerulea Sunset Frog* VU RP 86
Fish Galaxias truttaceus Western Trout Minnow* EN RP 33 Galaxiella munda Western Mud Minnow* VU CLA 262 Galaxiella nigrostriata Black -striped Minnow* P3 - 179 Geotria australia Pouched Lamprey* P1 - 11 Nannatherina balstoni Balston’s Pygmy Perch* VU CA 144
17 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Bioclimatic modelling For bioclimatic modelling, occurrence records for 43 of the 76 vertebrate species (State-listed as threatened, specially protected, or priority under the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950) initially examined were obtained from NatureMap ( http://naturemap.dpaw.wa.gov.au/default.aspx ), the Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW) species occurrence database (Table 1). Prior to modelling, records which had an accuracy uncertainty of more than 5000m were removed from the dataset, as were duplicate records. Additionally, as southwestern Australia underwent a step reduction in rainfall in 1975 (Hope et al. 2006), all occurrence records prior to 1976 were removed prior to analysis. The completed dataset comprised 18,612 records for 43 species representing 26 families and five vertebrate groups.
Modelling was performed for current (baseline) conditions and three future emission scenarios – low (B1), medium (A1B), and high (A2), based on the average of three Global Climate Models (GCMs) deemed suitable for the region (CSIRO Mk 3.5, MIUB ECHO-G, and MIROC-M) (Suppiah et al. 2007). Selection of suitable GCMs was facilitated by the use of the Climate Futures Tool housed on the Climate Change in Australia website ( www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au ). This tool organises climate models according to their simulated changes in rainfall and temperatures. The three models selected showed the greatest consensus. As the projection variability among models was low, an average was taken for each variable across the three GCMs sensu Fordham et al. (2011). The emission scenarios used were those described in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) (Nakicenovic and Swart 2000). Although the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) (Moss et al. 2010; Van Vuuren et al. 2011) and the SRES scenarios do not correspond directly to each other, carbon dioxide concentrations under RCP4.5 (intermediate emissions) is similar to that of the B1 scenario, and concentrations under RCP8.5 (high emissions) is similar to that of the A1F1 scenario. Future scenarios were modelled for 2030 and 2080.
Climate layers and altitude were sourced through the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security GCM data portal ( http://www.ccafs-climate.org/ ). Soil type was a rasterised version of “Geologic Unit Polygons 1M” sourced from Geoscience Australia (http://mapconnect.ga.gov.au/MapConnect/ ) (Table 2). Soil type was incorporated as an environmental
18 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
layer as soil type has been noted to be related to vegetation structure in SW WA Beard et al. (2000). A strong association between vertebrate species modelled and soil type was assumed to be representing the species affinities with a particular vegetation habitat. All layers were set to a 2.5 arc-minute (≈5km 2) grain size. Modelling was performed based on distributions at the extent of the state of Western Australia (WA) as some distributions did extend beyond the southwestern ecoregion; however, results are presented for only the southwestern ecoregion (Figure 1).
Table 2 Climatic and environmental variables utilised in species distribution modelling. Bioclim climate Variable name Abbreviation variable BIO2 Mean Diurnal Range (Mean of monthly (max temp - min temp)) DiurnTempRange BIO3 Isothermality (BIO2/BIO7) (* 100) IsoTherm BIO4 Temperature Seasonality (standard deviation *100) TempSeason BIO5 Max Temperature of Warmest Month MaxTempWarm BIO6 Min Temperature of Coldest Month MinTempCold BIO7 Temperature Annual Range (BIO5 -BIO6) AnnTempRange BIO8 Mean Temperature of Wettest Quarter MeanTempWet BIO9 Mean Temperature of Driest Quarter MeanTempDry BIO10 Mean Temperature of Warmest Quarter MeanTempWarm BIO11 Mean Temperature of Coldest Quarter MeanTempCold BIO12 Annual Precipitation AnnPrecip BIO13 Precipitation of Wettest Month PrecipWet BIO14 Precipitation of Driest Month PrecipDry BIO15 Precipitation Seasonality (Coefficient of Variation) PrecipSeason BIO16 Precipitation of Wettest Quarter PrecipWetQ BIO17 Precipitation of Driest Quarter PrecipDryQ BIO18 Precipitation of Warmest Quarter PrecipWarmQ BIO19 Precipitation of Coldest Quarter PrecipColdQ NA Altitude Altitude NA Soil Soil
19 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Species distribution modelling (SDM) was performed using MaxEnt V3.3.3 (Phillips et al. 2006; Phillips and Dudík 2008), considered to provide the most accurate predictions of a suite of available methods (Elith et al. 2006; Elith et al. 2011; Merow et al. 2013). Maxent analyses were performed with the following settings - background points were set to incorporate the whole of WA, hinge features were turned on to provide optimal environmental variable ranges as opposed to environmental thresholds, and thresholds were turned off to provide continuous probability of occurrence rather than binary presence absence outputs. Random seed was utilised, with regularisation left as default. To account for sampling bias (uneven spatial concentration of sampling effort), a total of 62 657 occurrence records of flora and fauna found in the SWA ecoregion were pooled, resulting in 196 860 cells at ≈ 5km 2 resolution across the state with samples in them. This provided a proxy of intensity of sampling effort, and thus incorporated the probability of sampling a location into the model (Kramer-Schadt et al., 2013). Clamping was utilised to retain species future distributions within their current climatic envelopes. Cumulative output was selected as this is appropriate for determining range boundaries and avoids the arbitrary or uncertain allocation of a value to τ (species probability of presence at “typical” sites) (Merow et al. 2013). Cross validation of 10 replicates was performed and the average of these was used as the final model for each species. The predictive accuracy of Maxent results was assessed through the standard measure of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). These scores range from 0 to 1, with a value of 0.5 indicating a performance no better than random. In our study, SDM results with AUC values of less than 0.75 were deemed unreliable and discarded (Elith et al. 2006).
In order to classify climate suitability for each species into a presence/absence format, all cells above the “Minimum training presence cumulative threshold” from the Maxent output were deemed as climatically suitable. We refer to these presence/absence suitable climate layers as ’PA suitable climate’. Percentage change in area of suitable climate was performed upon the PA suitable climate layers for each species, each emission scenario, and for each timeframe. Area of suitable climate for each layer was calculated using the “SDMTools” package (VanDerWal et al. 2014) in R V3.1.2 (R Core Team 2014). Variability in the change in climate envelope area was calculated as the range between the best and worst case emission scenarios for each species. For some species, the high (A2) emission scenario was the worst
20 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
case scenario (e.g. greatest loss or smallest increase in bioclimatic envelope), for others, the worst case scenario was the medium (A1B) emission scenario.
Suitable climate overlap was calculated as the areas where current and future PA suitable climate intersected. For each species and each scenario and timeframe, the number of cells which contained occurrence records (occupied cells) in the area of overlap was calculated as a proportion of the species’ total number of cells containing records. For this analysis, only occupied cells and climate overlap within the southwestern ecoregion of Australia were considered. In order to assess each species’ potential exposure (an element of vulnerability) to climate change, the minimum and maximum proportion of occupied cells in the suitable climate overlap across emission scenarios was plotted for each species for both 2030 and 2080. A reduction in proportion of occupied cells in the suitable climate overlap of each species was taken as a proxy for ‘reduction in population size’ and was aligned to the IUCN criteria, where a 90% decrease in population size indicates a “critically endangered” classification, a 70% decrease entails an “endangered” classification, and a 50% reduction results in a “vulnerable” assessment (IUCN 2012). Best and worst case emission scenarios were indicated.
Species were classified into potential management intensity groups based primarily on their predicted reduction in percentage of occurrence cells in the envelope overlap (proxy for population reduction) under best case emission scenarios. The primary groupings were 0 - 25% reduction, 25 – 50% reduction, and >50% reduction. The former two categories were selected to separate the species deemed not threatened by IUCN population reduction criteria into two categories of equal range, and classified as “0 - 25% population loss under best case scenario due to climate change” and “25 - 50% population loss under best case scenario due to climate change” respectively. The latter category was selected to represent the IUCN threatened categories, with 50 – 70% reduction indicating vulnerable species, and >70% representing endangered and critically endangered species. These species were classified as “Significantly threatened due to climate change”. Following this, any species which was predicted to lose more than 99% of its climate area under worst case emission scenario were placed in a “Potentially extinct due to climate change” category. Species that were in either of the IUCN not threatened categories but were predicted to lose more than 90% of their population under worst case scenarios were placed in a “High uncertainty, potentially at risk from climate change” category.
21 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Results
Inclusion of climate change in existing recovery documentation Of the 76 recovery documents examined, 42.1% included climate change as a threatening process (Figure 3). Other threats of significance included habitat loss (mentioned in 90.8% of plans), introduced species (77.6%) and inappropriate fire regimes (71.1%). No documents dated prior to 2004 identified climate change as a threat (Figure 4). A marked increase in the proportion of documents including climate change is evident from 2005 onwards; 53% of documents dated from 2005-2009 and 75% of documents dated from 2010-2014 identified climate change as a potential threat. The proportion of recovery documents that identified climate change varied among taxonomic groups (Table 3). Climate change was identified as a threatening process in more than 50% of recovery documents for amphibians, mammals and reptiles; for all other groups this proportion was less than 50%.
Figure 3 Proportion of recovery documents that have identified each of eight threatening processes.
22 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 4 Proportion of recovery documents noting climate change as a threatening process across years.
Table 3 Inclusion of climate change in recovery documentation for vertebrate groups in southwestern Australia by faunal group. Proportion of recovery documents with climate change listed as a threat shown in parenthesis. Group Threatened or Priority Recovery Documents Recovery Documents Fauna with Climate Change Inclusion Amphibians 4 3 2 (66.7%) Birds 44 35 12 (34.3%) Fish 6 3 1 (33.3%) Mammals 31 26 13 (50.0%)
Reptiles 38 9 5 (55.6%) Total 123 76 33 (43.4%)
23 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Bioclimatic modelling Precipitation of Coldest Quarter (winter rain) was the most important climate variable, with an overall average importance of 25.9% (Figure 5). This average importance increased to 48.5% when only considering the 18 species for which it was the major driver (results not presented). Soil was the next most important variable at 13.3% overall and 39.4% for the six species for which it was the major driver. This result possibly represents the soil affinities of flora which provides habitat or resources for some of the threatened fauna. Mean Temperature of the Warmest Quarter, Annual Precipitation, Maximum Temperature of the Warmest Quarter, Mean Temperature of the Wettest Quarter, Precipitation of the Driest Month, and Precipitation of the Driest Quarter all had a small, but comparable importance, ranging from 7.5% to 5.9% (Figure 5).
Figure 5 Average importance of climatic variables for all species modelled. Climatic variable abbreviations as in Table 2.
24 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
By both 2030 and 2080, the majority of threatened vertebrates were projected to experience decreases in the area of their climate envelopes (Figure 6 andFigure 7). By 2030, the area of climate envelopes for 33 species (76.7%) was predicted to be smaller than current (Figure 6). For the remaining 10 species, nine were predicted to have an increase in the area of climate envelope, regardless of best or worst case emission scenario. Only one species, the Western bristlebird ( Dasyornis longirostris ), was predicted to experience an increased area of climate envelope under best case scenario, and a reduction of climate envelope under worst case scenario (Figure 6). Four species ( Ninox connivens connivens , Spicospina flammocaerulea , Ctenotus delli , and Cacatua pastinator pastinator ) were predicted to lose more than 90% of their climate envelope under best case emission scenarios, and an additional two species ( Nyctophilus major and Geocrinia lutea ) were predicted to lose more than 90% of their climate envelope area under worst case emission scenarios by 2030 (Figure 6).
25 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 6 Range in the predicted percent change in area of climate envelope by 2030 for species modelled. Best case scenario is the emission scenario with the least reduction or greatest expansion of envelope area, worst case scenario is the emission scenario with the most reduction or least expansion of envelope area.
26 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 7 Range in the predicted percent change in area of climate envelope by 2080 for species modelled. Best case scenario is the emission scenario with the least reduction or greatest expansion of envelope area, worst case scenario is the emission scenario with the most reduction or least expansion of envelope area.
27 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
The changes in area of climate envelope displayed greater variability across emission scenarios by 2080, with climate envelopes of ten species (23.3 %) projected to increase under best case scenarios. However, the bioclimatic envelopes of eight of these species were shown to decrease under worst case scenarios (Figure 7). Overall, climate envelopes were projected to decrease in area by 2080 for 32 species (74.4 %), regardless of best or worst case emission scenarios. Three species (7.0 %) were projected to experience increased climate envelope area by 2080 under both best and worst case emission scenarios (Figure 7). By 2080, three species were predicted to lose more than 90% of the area of their climate envelope under best case scenarios ( N. connivens connivens , C. delli , and C. pastinator pastinator ). Under worst case emission scenarios, 15 species were predicted to lose more than 90% of the area of their climate envelopes (Figure 7).
Using percentage of occupied cells in the climate envelope overlap as a proxy for realised distribution, we estimated that by 2030 under best case emission scenarios, 36 of the 43 species modelled would retain at least 50% of their current populations (Figure 8). When worst case scenarios were considered, seven of these 36 species ( Calyptorhynchus banksii naso , Morelia spilota imbricata , Lerista lineata , Parantechinus apicalis , Platycercus icterotis xanthogenys , Galaxias truttaceus , and D. longirostris ) were predicted to lose more than 50% of their current realised distribution (Figure 8). Of the remaining seven species modelled, three ( C. pastinator pastinator , S. flammocaerulea and C. delli ) were predicted to lose more than 90% of their current occupied cells under best and worst case scenarios (thus ‘critically endangered’), with two of these species ( C. pastinator pastinator and S. flammocaerulea ), predicted to lose all their current realised distribution. Ninox connivens connivens is predicted to lose more than 70% under both scenarios, while G. lutea is predicted to lose more than 70% and all of its population under best and worst case emission scenarios respectively, meeting the IUCN criteria for ‘endangered’. Two species (Atrichornis clamosus and N. major ) are predicted to lose between 50 and 70% of their current realised distribution under best case scenarios, thus meeting the IUCN criteria for ‘vulnerable’ status. Under worst case scenarios, A. clamosus was predicted to lose more than 95% occurrence cells in the overlap of current and future bioclimatic envelopes, while N. major was predicted to lose nearly 90% of its current realised distribution (Figure 8). Of these seven species predicted to lose 50% or more of their occupied cells, five were not considered to be under threat from climate change according to recovery documentation.
28 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Much greater variability was observed between best and worst case scenarios by 2080 than for the year 2030, likely reflecting greater differentiation among the emission scenarios over time. By 2080 under best case scenarios, 32 species were predicted to retain more than 50% of their current realised distribution (Figure 9). Of these, 17 species ( Geocrinia alba , Isoodon obesulus fusciventer , Myrmecobius fasciatus , Calyptorhynchus baudinii , Pseudomys shortridgei , Petrogale lateralis lateralis , Bettongia penicillata ogilbyi , G. lutea , Nannatherina balstoni , Hylacola cauta whitlocki , Psophodes nigrogularis oberon , L. lineata , S. flammocaerulea , Macropus eugenii derbianus , D. longirostris , Pseudocheirus occidentalis , and Falsistrellus mackenziei ) were predicted to lose more than 50% of their populations by 2080 under worst case emission scenarios. Our results suggested that regardless of emission scenario, at least 11 species could be significantly threatened by climate change by 2080 (Figure 9). Four species ( C. banksii naso , Pseudomys occidentalis , M. spilota imbricata and P. apicalis ) are predicted to lose 50% to 70% of their population under their best case emission scenario. Under their worst case scenarios, these species were predicted to lose >70% ( M. spilota imbricata ), >90% ( P. occidentalis and P. apicalis ) and all of their current realised distribution ( C. banksii naso ). A further three species ( G. truttaceus , N. connivens connivens , and P. icterotis xanthogenys ) are predicted to lose more than 70% of their occurrence cells under best case emission scenarios. Of these, N. connivens connivens is predicted to lose 80%, and G. truttaceus and P. icterotis xanthogenys are predicted to lose all of their current realised distribution under worst case emission scenarios. A. clamosus , C. pastinator pastinator , C. delli , and N. major are predicted to lose all of their current realised distribution under both best and worst case emission scenarios by 2080 (Figure 9).
29 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 8 Range in percent of occurrence records in predicted area of climate envelope overlap by 2030 for each species. Species marked by a circle indicate a prediction of no suitable climate under at least the worst case emission scenario.
30 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 9 Range in percent of occurrence records in predicted area of climate envelope overlap by 2080 for each species. Species marked by a circle indicate a prediction of no suitable climate under at least the worst case emission scenario.
31 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Based on the results of the bioclimatic modelling, we ranked species according to their potential exposure to climate change threats against a gradient of increasing management intervention, placing them into proposed ‘management response’ categories (Figure 10). Four species were identified as likely to go extinct due to their exposure to climate change (category A), five species were identified as potentially significantly threated by climate change (category B), and a further eight species had a very uncertain future (category C). The recovery documentation for seven of these 17 species (41.2%) did not identify climate change as a threat (Table 4).
32 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Figure 10 Proposed gradient of management interventions for mitigating climate change impacts for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
33 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Table 4 Climate change threats and mitigation identified in recovery documents for threatened vertebrate species considered most exposed to climate change threats. Group Species Common name Climate change threats Proposed mitigation Mammals Isoodon obesulus fusciventer Quenda Not identified Not identified Myrmecobius fasciatus Numbat Not thought to reduce distribution, could Research to assess vulnerability lead to increased fires to climate change Nyctophilus major Central Long - Not identified Not identified eared Bat Petrogale lateralis lateralis Black -flanked Changes in rainfall and temperature Translocations to increase Rock-wallaby leading to habitat loss and thus number of populations decreased body condition, reproduction and survival, large bushfires and drought Parantechinus apicalis Dibbler Not identified Not identified Pseudomys shortridgei Heath Mouse Not identified Not identified Pseudomys occidentalis Western Mouse Not identified Not identified
Birds Atrichornis clamosus Noisy Scrub -bird Increased temperatures leading to loss of Not identified, translocation not remnant vegetation and food sources, linked to climate change increase in invasive species, increased mitigation lightning strikes and fires
34 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Group Species Common name Climate change threats Proposed mitigation Cacatua pastinator pastinator Muir’s Corella Changes in ecosystem functioning and Not identif ied biodiversity, southward movement of feral bees due to warming
Calyptorhynchus banksii naso Forest Red - Changes in ecosystem functioning and Not identified tailed Black biodiversity, southward movement of Cockatoo feral bees due to warming Ninox connivens connivens Barking Owl Not identified Not identified (SW population) Platycercus icterotis Western Rosella Not identified Not identified xanthogenys (inland ssp.)
Reptiles Ctenotus delli Dell’s Skink Not identified Not identified
Amphibians Geocrinia alba White -bellied Increased fire frequencies, loss of canopy Research hydrological Frog continuity, reduced rainfall requirements, investigate manipulation of habitat with artificial water systems, monitor ground water, rainfall and temperature Geocrinia lutea Nornalup Frog Not identified Not identified
35 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Group Species Common name Climate change threats Proposed mitigation Spicospina flammocaerulea Sunset Frog Not identified Not identified
Fish Galaxias truttaceus Western Trout Alteration of flows and water Research temperature Minnow temperatures tolerances, translocation not linked to climate change mitigation
36 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Discussion
Despite increasing attention paid to climate change as a threat in recovery and action plans for threatened species, particularly after 2005, our results demonstrate that there are still a number of species that are likely to be under threat from climate change that do not have this threat addressed in their recovery documentation. Our analyses identified 17 species that were either potentially at risk from extinction due to climate change, significantly threatened due to climate change, or have a very uncertain future, and are potentially at risk from climate change. The recovery documentation for 10 of these 17 species (58.8%) did not identify climate change as a threat. At the very least, the recovery documentation of these species should be updated to include recovery actions that address climate change. A high priority should be given to undertaking full climate change vulnerability analyses for these 17 most threatened species. While our results give an indication of likely ‘exposure’ to climate change, they do not take into account other aspects, such as intrinsic biological traits that could either make species vulnerable (Dickinson et al. 2014), or allow them to persist despite high exposure to climate change. These traits should be used in combination with estimates of exposure for a full assessment of vulnerability, where three major components are included: exposure (extent of climate change likely to be experienced by the species), sensitivity (degree to which the persistence of a species is dependent on climatic factors) and adaptive capacity (capacity of a species to adapt to climate change) (Williams et al. 2008; Bagne et al. 2011; Dawson et al. 2011; Foden et al. 2013).
Our analysis showed that threatened vertebrates in southwestern Australia are likely to exhibit a variable response to climate change, with the majority of threatened vertebrates projected to experience decreases in the area of their climate envelopes. We have used this variable response to prioritise climate change mitigation actions for threatened species. As a first step, we ranked all the species modelled according to their predicted exposure to climate change and placed them into categories based on a proposed gradient of management intervention aimed at mitigating this exposure. Following Foin et al. (1998), we propose that recovery actions aimed at reducing climate change threats for species falling into category E (0-25% population loss under best case scenario) are likely to be focussed on preserving current habitat. Recovery actions for species placed into categories D (25-50% population loss) and C (highly uncertain future, potentially at risk from climate change) are likely to be focussed on preservation and restoration of habitats, regular monitoring and targeted investigations to address knowledge gaps limiting
37 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
the prediction of their likely response to climate change. Those species placed in category B (significantly threatened) are likely to require the establishment of active management strategies specifically targeted to mitigating risks associated with climate change.
It is unclear what recovery actions would be most appropriate for the four species ( Atrichornis clamosus , Cacatua pastinator pastinator , Ctenotus delli and Nyctophilus major ) that are potentially at risk of extinction due to climate change (category A). Only two of these four species have climate change identified as a threat, even though our modelling suggests that there will be no climatically suitable habitat for these species in the future. Included amongst the five species identified in this category is the ‘Endangered’ Noisy Scrub-bird, Atrichornis clamosus . This semi-flightless, insectivorous passerine has a very narrow distribution, restricted to dense scrub and low forest habitats in the South Coast region of Western Australia. Previous assessments of vulnerability to climate change for threatened species have suggested that the most narrowly distributed species, such as the Noisy Scrub-bird, are the most vulnerable to climate change (Lee et al. 2015). Since its re-discovery in 1961, it has been the subject of intense management that has included both habitat protection and translocations to new sites to save the species from extinction (see Danks 1997, and references therein; Gilfillan et al. 2009). Habitat alteration due to changes in fire regimes has been considered a leading factor responsible for the decline of the Noisy Scrub- bird (Smith and Forrester 1981; Smith 1985), and extensive fire continues to be the single most significant threat to their persistence (Gilfillan et al. 2009). Our results suggest that this threat might be compounded by the loss of climatically suitable habitat in the future, with modelling results predicting a 74.5% loss of bioclimatic envelope by 2030, and 100% by 2080. This species is currently extant in only two restricted locations within close proximity of each other, although it was more widespread in the 1800s and therefore may have a wider climatic envelope than suggested by the modelling. Modelling of the species using pre 1976 records was not undertaken as southwestern Australia underwent a reduction in rainfall in 1975 (Hope et al. 2006) and therefore would have been climatically different. More detailed analyses of climatically suitable habitat are needed for this and other species in this category.
Our bioclimatic modelling identified five threatened species ( Galaxias truttaceus , C. banksii naso , P. icterotis xanthogenys , N. connivens connivens , and P. occidentalis ) that are potentially significantly threatened by climate change (Category B), and we proposed that active management strategies be used to
38 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
mitigate this threat for these species. Climate change is listed as a ‘potential threat’ in recovery planning documents for both G. truttaceus and C. banksii naso , albeit rather broadly, noting its effect on water temperature and river flows, and its effect on exacerbating other threats respectively. In contrast, climate change was not identified as a threat for P. icterotis xanthogenys , N. connivens connivens , or P. occidentalis . Although G. truttaceus is predicted to lose more than 70% of its population by 2080 under its best case emission scenarios, and all of its population by 2080 under worst case emission scenarios, the modelling suggests that suitable climate will persist for this species in areas where they presently do not occur. As Western Australian populations of this species complete their life-cycle within freshwater habitats, rather than having the amphidromous life-cycle typical of other populations (Humphries 1989, 1990), their ability to colonise these climatically suitable habitats without anthropogenic intervention in the future is doubtful. More generally, climate related changes in flow are considered a primary threat to regional freshwater fish assemblages, especially species that undertake distinct migrations to complete life cycles (Beatty et al. 2010; Morrongiello et al. 2011; Beatty et al. 2014). In the case of G. truttaceus , recent research demonstrates spawning, larval drift, and juvenile recruitment is strongly linked to river flow (PGC unpublished data; see also Morgan et al. 2016). Although thermal tolerance of the species has not been determined, the risk of the thermal tolerances of fish being exceeded (Davies, 2010), could directly impact reproduction and growth (sensu Pen and Potter 1991) or lead to a decoupling of the thermal and hydrological conditions essential for life-history strategies (Morrongiello et al. 2011). Two of the three known populations from Western Australia occur in catchments currently or potentially impacted by flow alteration due to surface or groundwater abstraction. Active management strategies required for this species could focus on the protection of in-stream and riparian habitats at currently known sites and protection of specific flow regimes in developed catchments to maintain key life history events. Given the inability of this species to colonise new areas of suitable climate in the future, and that the species is considered an evolutionary significant unit (Morgan et al. 2016) translocation may be necessary, noting that this option should be considered together with the possible effects of introducing a new species to the biological communities and ecosystem function of the recipient catchment (Olden et al. 2011).
Each of the three bird species identified as Category B, and therefore requiring active management of climate change threats, show substantial reduction in suitable habitat under all emission scenarios by
39 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
2030, with further reductions by 2080. For both C. banksii naso and P. icterotis xanthogenys our modelling indicated progressive contraction of suitable climatic conditions to the south-western portion of their present range, whereas for N. connivens connivens , future suitable climate conditions generally occur close to existing known populations. Each of these species have biological traits or habitat associations that indicate actions that could potentially mitigate risks associated with changing climate conditions by maintaining or increasing the extent and quality of habitats to support increasingly concentrated population distributions. For example, all three species are cavity nesters and therefore rely on older forests with suitable nesting hollows (e.g. Garnett et al. 2011). As up to 16% of suitable nest trees are lost per decade as the result of wind fall, fire and forest maintenance (Johnstone et al. 2013), active management should target those remaining ‘old-growth’ forests within the predicted future distribution and include appropriate fire and forest management to protect nesting sites. While the predicted future climate envelop for C. banksii naso contains relatively continuous forest, the western rosella P. icterotis xanthogenys inhabits fragmented remnant vegetation within agricultural areas of southwestern Australia’s interior region. Active management for this species should also aim to maintain or improve the habitat mosaic within the southwest corner of its current range to aid dispersal into this region and support sustainability of populations within the future climate envelope. The current distribution of N. connivens connivens includes only a few populations restricted to forested habitats, and our modelling suggests that these suitable climate conditions generally occur close to existing known populations. Active management for this species should aim to protect areas of suitable habitat within and nearby the currently known locations of each population.
Very little future suitable climate is predicted for P. occidentalis by 2080 under medium and high emission scenarios, and contraction into the southern region of its current climate envelope under the low emission scenario. Predictions for this species by 2030 are similar across emission scenarios, and comparable to that of the low emission scenario by 2080, although less severe. With the exception of the two worst case scenarios for this species, future suitable climate is predicted to exist within regions which are both currently climatically suitable and vegetated, some of which is classified as National Park. As noted in the IUCN assessment for this species (Morris et al. 2008), monitoring of current populations is recommended as most populations are found in a highly fragmented landscape. Inclusion of climate
40 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
change related mitigation activities for this species could include planning for translocation of populations to predicted climatically suitable vegetated or protected areas if monitoring detects possible effects of climate change upon the populations.
Amongst the group of species that we identified as having an uncertain response to climate change (category C), were three frog species ( Geocrinia alba , G. lutea and Spicospina flammocaerulea ). In agreement with other studies that have suggested that amphibians are particularly vulnerable to climate change (e.g. Lee et al. 2015), our study suggests that these frog species may be at risk. All three have specialised habitat requirements, particularly for breeding (Wardell-Johnson and Roberts 1993; Roberts et al. 1999; Anstis 2013), and restricted distributions. Some species, such as Spicospina flammocaerulea have survived through major shifts in rainfall (particularly markedly drier phases in the Pliocene and Pleistocene) and higher temperatures in the Miocene (Byrne et al. 2008, 2011; Rix et al. 2015). This, together with their phylogeographic structure, is consistent with dispersal capability (Edwards and Roberts 2011). For other species, such as Geocrinia lutea , dispersal to areas of future suitable climate may be severely limited by landscape boundaries and habitat availability (Wardell-Johnson and Roberts 1993).
Projected population loss for species falling into categories D and E varied from 0-50%. Seven species listed in these categories had climate change noted in their recovery plans and associated documentation. The default inclusion of climate in the planning for these species has been based on the projected general trends of increasing temperature and declining rainfall in the region as well as modelling. Because the majority of these species have distributions orientated north-south, the impacts of climate change on the population persistence into the future are likely to be low. This assumes those populations currently inhabiting area’s in the northern extent of their range have the ability to disperse south to follow the predicted future trajectory of suitable climate conditions. For these species, the establishment of targeted monitoring programs that assess population status and species distributions will provide an opportunity for the early detection of climate related impacts on individual species, and therefore the opportunity to develop and implement active management to mitigate the effects of climate change if needed.
41 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Using the case study of threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia, this study successfully ranked species in terms of their potential exposure to climate change using bioclimatic modelling, and proposed a gradient of management interventions that varied from active management actions such as translocations through to habitat conservation. Such an approach aimed at prioritising climate change mitigation in threatened species would be useful for other regions where it has been predicted that climate change could have a negative impact on biodiversity. This pragmatic approach allows a first prioritisation, where species likely to be most at risk can be targeted for further attention. Where climate change has not been identified as a key threatening process in recovery documentation for these species, this should be included in updated recovery plans, and comprehensive climate change vulnerability analyses should be conducted for those species considered most at risk.
42 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
References
Anstis M (2013) Tadpoles and frogs of Australia. New Holland Publishers, Sydney. Bagne KE, Friggens MM, Coe SJ, Finch DM (2014) The importance of assessing climate change vulnerability to address species conservation. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 5, 450-462. Beard J, Chapman A, Gioia P (2000) Species richness and endemism in the Western Australian flora. Journal of Biogeography 27, 1257-1268. Beatty S, Morgan D, McAleer F, Ramsay A (2010) Groundwater contribution to baseflow maintains habitat connectivity for Tandanus bostocki (Teleostei: Plotosidae) in a south-western Australian river. Ecology of Freshwater Fish, 19, 595-608. Beatty SJ, Morgan DL, Lymbery AJ (2014) Implications of climate change for potamodromous fishes. Global Change Biology, 20, 1794-807. Boersma PD, Kareiva P, Fagan WF, Clark JA, Hoekstra JM (2001) How good are endangered species recovery plans? BioScience 51, 643-649. Bottrill MC, Walsh JC, Watson JEM, Joseph LN, Ortega-Argueta A, Possingham HP (2011) Does recovery planning improve the status of threatened species? Biological Conservation 144, 1595-1601. Carroll R, Augspurger C, Dobson A, Franklin J, Orians G, Reid W, Tracy R, Wilcove D, Wilson J (1996) Strengthening the use of science in achieving the goals of the Endangered Species Act: an assessment by the Ecological Society of America. Ecological Applications 6, 1-11. Danks A (1997) Conservation of the Noisy Scrub-bird: a review of 35 years of research and management. Pacific Conservation Biology 3, 341-349. Davies PM (2010) Climate change implications for river restoration in global biodiversity hotspots. Journal of Restoration Ecology 18, 261-268. Dawson TP, Jackson ST, House JI, Prentice IC, Mace GM (2011) Beyond predictions: biodiversity conservation in a changing climate. Science 332, 53-58. Dickinson MG, Orme CDL, Suttle KB, Mace GM (2014) Separating sensitivity from exposure in assessing extinction risk from climate change. Scientific reports 4. Easterling DR, Meehl GA, Parmesan C, Changnon SA, Karl TR, Mearns LO (2000) Climate extremes: observations, modeling, and impacts. Science 289, 2068-2074. Edwards D, Roberts JD (2011) Genetic diversity and biogeographic history inform future conservation management strategies for the rare sunset frog (Spicospina flammocaerulea). Australian Journal of Zoology 59, 63-72. Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudík M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, Li J, Lohmann LG, Loiselle BA, Manion G, Moritz C, Nakamura M, Nakazawa Y, Overton JM,
43 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Peterson AT, Phillips SJ, Richardson K, Scachetti-Pereira R, Schapire RE, Soberon J, Williams S, Wisz MS, Zimmermann NE (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29, 129–151. Elith J, Phillips SJ, Hastie T, Dudík M, Chee YE, Yates CJ (2011) A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Diversity and Distributions 17, 43-57. EPBC Act. 1999. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Commonwealth of Australia. Evans MC, Watson JEM, Fuller RA, Venter O, Bennett SC, Marsack PR, Possingham HP (2011) The spatial distribution of threats to species in Australia. BioScience 61, 281-289. Foden WB, Butchart SH, Stuart SN, Vié J-C, Akçakaya HR, Angulo A, DeVantier LM, Gutsche A, Turak E, Cao L (2013) Identifying the world's most climate change vulnerable species: a systematic trait-based assessment of all birds, amphibians and corals. PLoS ONE 8, e65427. Foin TC, Riley SPD, Pawley AL, Ayres DR, Carlsen TM, Hodum PJ, Switzer PV (1998) Improving recovery planning for threatened and endangered species. BioScience 48, 177-184. Fordham DA, Wigley TM, Brook BW (2011) Multi-model climate projections for biodiversity risk assessments. Ecological Applications 21, 3317-3331. Garnett ST, Szabo J, Dutson G (2011) The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria. Gilfillan S, Comer S, Burbidge AH, Blyth J, Danks A, Newell J (2009) South Coast Threatened Birds Recovery Plan 2009-2018: Western Ground Parrot (Pezoporus wallicus flaviventris); Western Bristlebird (Dasyornis longirostris); Noisy Scrub-bird (Atrichornis clamosus), Western Whipbird (western heath) (Psophodes nigrogularis nigrogularis); Western Whipbird (western mallee) (Psophodes nigrogularis oberon); Rufous Bristlebird (western) (Dasyornis broadbenti litoralis). Western Australian Wildlife Management Program No. 44, Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth. Hope PK, Drosdowsky W, Nicholls N (2006) Shifts in the synoptic systems influencing southwest Western Australia. Climate dynamics 26, 751-764. Hughes L (2003) Climate change and Australia: trends, projections and impacts. Austral Ecology 28, 423-443. Humphries P (1989) Variation in the life history of diadromous and landlocked populations of the spotted galaxias, Galaxias truttaceus Valenciennes, in Tasmania. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 40, 501–518. doi:10.1071/MF9890501. Humphries P (1990) Morphological variation in diadromous and landlocked populations of the spotted galaxias, Galaxias truttaceus, in Tasmania, southeastern Australia. Environmental Biology of Fishes 27, 97– 105. doi:10.1007/BF00001939.
44 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Indian Ocean Climate Initiative (2002) Climate variability and change in south west Western Australia. Department of Environment, Perth, Australia. IUCN (2012) IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition., 2nd edn. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge. Johnstone RE, Kirkby T, Sarti K (2013) The breeding biology of the Forest Red-tailed Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso Gould in south-western Australia. 1. Characteristics of nest trees and nest hollows. Pacific Conservation Biology. 19(3). 121-42. Kramer-Schadt S, Niedballa J, Pilgrim JD, Schröder B, Lindenborn J, Reinfelder V, Stillfried M, Heckmann I, Scharf AK, Augeri DM, Cheyne SM, Hearn AJ, Ross J, Macdonald DW, Mathai J, Eaton J, Marshall AJ, Semiadi G, Rustam R, Bernard H, Alfred R, Samejima H, Duckworth JW, Breitenmoser-Wuersten C, Belant JL, Hofer H, Wilting A (2013) The importance of correcting for sampling bias in MaxEnt species distribution models. Diversity and Distributions 19, 1366-1379. Lawler JJ, Campbell SP, Guerry AD, Kolozsvary MB, O’Connor RJ, Seward LCN (2002) The scope and treatment of threats in endangered species recovery plans. Ecological Applications 12, 663-667. Lee JR, Maggini R, Taylor MF, Fuller RA (2015) Mapping the Drivers of Climate Change Vulnerability for Australia’s Threatened Species. PLoS ONE 10, e0124766. Lindenmayer DB, Steffen W, Burbidge AA, Hughes L, Kitching RL, Musgrave W, Smith MS, Werner PA (2010) Conservation strategies in response to rapid climate change: Australia as a case study. Biological Conservation 143, 1587-1593. Lintermans M (2013) A review of on-ground recovery actions for threatened freshwater fish in Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 64, 775-791. Lundquist CJ, Diehl JM, Harvey E, Botsford LW (2002) Factors affecting implementation of recovery plans. Ecological Applications 12, 713-718. Merow C, Smith MJ, Silander JA (2013) A practical guide to MaxEnt for modeling species’ distributions: what it does, and why inputs and settings matter. Ecography 36, 1058-1069. Morgan DL, Beatty SJ, Close PG, Allen MG, Unmack PJ, Hammer MP, Adams M (2016) Resolving the taxonomy, range and ecology of biogeographically isolated and critically endangered populations of an Australian freshwater galaxiid, Galaxias truttaceus. Pacific Conservation Biology 22, 1–10. Morris K, Burbidge A, Friend T (2008) Pseudomys occidentalis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T18553A8429880. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T18553A8429880.en. Downloaded on 04 July 2016.
45 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Morrongiello JR, Beatty SJ, Bennett JC, Crook DA, Ikedife DN, Kennard MJ, Kerezsy A, Lintermans ML, McNeil DG, Pusey BJ, Rayner T (2011) Climate change and its implications for Australia’s freshwater fish. Marine and Freshwater Research 62, 1082–1098. doi:10.1071/MF10308. Moss RH, Edmonds JA, Hibbard KA, Manning MR, Rose SK, Van Vuuren DP, Carter TR, Emori S, Kainuma M, Kram T (2010) The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747-756. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Da Fonseca GA, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853-858. Nakicenovic N, Swart R (eds) (2000) IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. Cambridge University Press, UK. Olden JD, Kennard MJ, Lawler JJ, Poff NL (2011) Challenges and opportunities in implementing managed relocation for conservation of freshwater species. Conservation Biology 25, 40–47. doi:10.1111/J.1523- 1739.2010.01557.X. Pen LJ, Potter IC (1991) The biology of the western pygmy perch, Edelia vittata, and comparisons with two other teleost species endemic to south-western Australia. Environmental Biology of Fishes 31, 365–380. doi:10.1007/BF00002362. Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological modelling 190, 231-259. Phillips SJ, Dudík M (2008) Modeling of species distributions with Maxent: new extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography 31, 161-175. Povilitis A, Suckling K (2010) Addressing climate change threats to endangered species in US recovery plans. Conservation Biology 24, 372-376. Prudhomme C, Giuntoli I, Robinson EL, Clark DB, Arnell NW, Dankers R, Fekete BM, Franssen W, Gerten D, Gosling SN, Hagemann S, Hannah DM, Kim H, Masaki Y, Satoh Y, Stacke T, Wada Y, Wisser D (2014) Hydrological droughts in the 21st century, hotspots and uncertainties from a global multimodel ensemble experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 3262–3267. R Development Core Team (2014) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
46 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Schwartz MW, Iverson LR, Prasad AM, Matthews SN, O'Connor RJ (2006) Predicting extinctions as a result of climate change. Ecology 87, 1611-1615. Smith GT (1985) Population and habitat selection of the Noisy Scrub-bird, Atrichornis clamosus, 1962-83. Aust. Wildl. Res. 12, 479-485. Smith GT, Forrester RI (1981) The status of the Noisy Scrub-bird Atrichornis clamosus. Biological Conservation 19, 239-254. Stokstad E (2005) What’s wrong with the endangered species act? Science 309, 2150-2152. Suppiah R, Hennessy K, Whetton P, McInnes K, Macadam I, Bathols J, Ricketts J, Page C (2007) Australian climate change projections derived from simulations performed for the IPCC 4th Assessment Report. Australian Meteorological Magazine 56, 131-152. Taylor MFJ, Suckling KF, Rachlinski JJ (2005) The effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act: a quantitative analysis. BioScience 55, 360-367. Taylor MFJ, Sattler PS, Evans M, Fuller RA, Watson JEM, Possingham HP (2011) What works for threatened species recovery? An empirical evaluation for Australia. Biodiversity Conservation 20, 767-777. Thomas CD, Cameron A, Green RE, Bakkenes M, Beaumont LJ, Collingham YC, Erasmus BF, De Siqueira MF, Grainger A, Hannah L (2004) Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427, 145-148. Thomas CD, Hill JK, Anderson BJ, Bailey S, Beale CM, Bradbury RB, Bulman CR, Crick HQP, Eigenbrod F, Griggiths HM, Kunin WE, Oliver TH, Walmsley CA, Watts K, Worsfold NT, Yardley T (2011) A framework for assessing threats and benefits to species responding to climate change. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 2(2),125-142 Tear TH, Scott JM, Hayward PH, Griffith B (1995) Recovery plans and the Endangered Species Act: are criticisms supported by data? Conservation Biology 9, 182-195. VanDerWal J, Falconi L, Januchowski S, Shoo L, Storlie C (2014) SDMTools: Species Distribution Modelling Tools: Tools for processing data associated with species distribution modelling exercises. R package version 1.1-221. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=SDMTools. Van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson A, Hibbard K, Hurtt GC, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque J- F (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Climatic Change 109, 5-31. Wardell-Johnson G, Roberts JD (1993) Biogeographic barriers in a subdued landscape: the distribution of the Geocrinia rosea (Anura: Myobatrachidae) complex in south-western Australia. Journal of Biogeography, 95- 108. Westwood A, Reuchlin-Hugenholtz E, Keith DM (2014) Re-defining recovery: A generalized framework for assessing species recovery. Biological Conservation 172, 155-162
47 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Williams SE, Shoo LP, Isaac JL, Hoffmann AA, Langham G (2008) Towards an integrated framework for assessing the vulnerability of species to climate change. PLoS Biol 6, e325.
48 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
Contact Details Barbara Cook Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, UWA [email protected]
Ben Ford Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, UWA [email protected]
Bronte Van Helden Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, UWA [email protected]
Dale Roberts Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, UWA [email protected]
Paul Close Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, UWA [email protected]
Peter Speldewinde Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, UWA [email protected]
50 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.
51 Incorporating climate change into recovery planning for threatened vertebrate species in southwestern Australia.